https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370233 The 2016 amendment to section 21 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, was treated as procedural because it changed only the condition for entertaining an appeal, not the substantive right of appeal, and therefore operated retrospectively. The Court held that the amended pre-deposit regime, including the limited scope for waiver, applied to the pending appeal. It also upheld the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal's insistence on statutory pre-deposit, rejecting unsupported claims of financial hardship and confirming that the Tribunal could refuse restoration, enlargement of time, and related relief where compliance was not shown. en-us Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370233 The 2016 amendment to section 21 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, was treated as procedural because it changed only the condition for entertaining an appeal, not the substantive right of appeal, and therefore operated retrospectively. The Court held that the amended pre-deposit regime, including the limited scope for waiver, applied to the pending appeal. It also upheld the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal's insistence on statutory pre-deposit, rejecting unsupported claims of financial hardship and confirming that the Tribunal could refuse restoration, enlargement of time, and related relief where compliance was not shown. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370233